Specialist Arms Forum
Battlefleet Gothic => [BFG] Discussion => Topic started by: Lord Duggie The Mad on November 19, 2010, 02:41:58 PM
-
I'm still fairly new BFG and I've bought a retribution for the Imperial Navy. After looking at the model and consulting the Smotherman formula I suggested to my regular opponent that to make it function as the model appears one might revise it as follows:
45cm weapons batteries either side with 18 firepower
45cm strength 5 dorsal lance battery
Strength 6 torpedo salvo from the prow launch tubes.
New cost = 350 points.
She agreed that sounded fair but we are both quite inexperienced players. Any thoughts from the veterans on whether this looking a bit cheesy?
-
As long as your opponents agree you can use absolutely anything =)
The firepower is too high for imperial BB. Just look at most BB that are available and you will see that your ship has more firepower than anything.
This is wrong but as I said before as long as you guys agree - its ok =)
-
That is way overboard for the stats on the ret. You are giving it almost as much firepower as the planet killer for 150 points less.
-
Fair point Vaaish. I just wonder though if the retribution is undergunned. I mean, the Emperor class can thump out 16 firepower if you combine all the batteries to a side and then you also have the ordnance. Of course the retribution has lances that offset some of the difference but I can't quite shake the feeling the retribution is a bit expensive for what you get.
Have to admit though this is all academic - haven't painted it yet and so haven't used it in a game to see how it really performs...
-
the ret is a slight be undergunned but not by as much as you tacked on.
-
Yeah, I will concede that. Looking through some of the PDF's 18 and 5 does sound over the top. Maybe I should have stuck with the Emperor.....
-
Not everything that is pointy needs to be a gun. Remember that even thou FP16 seems alot it still only gives some 2-3 dice when trying to hit a moving target at long ranges. The Retribuion has a formidable lance array even at extreme ranges and lances are not reduced in strength at extreme ranges like firepower.
-
I think the Retribution simply needs an upturn its in broadside range to 16 or 14. Probably 14.
-
Either up the broadside FP to 14 or change it to FP18@45 cm while keeping the other weapons. Personally, I prefer the latter.
-
FP 15 at R60 or FP 18 at R45. Keep other weapons as they are.
Old discussion, new participants.
-
Dorsal lances stay at 3. Upping broadsides as admiral d'artagnan says.
Prow torps remain at 9.
-
Am I the only one who thinks the model works just fine?
Just because it has six lance turrets on each side does not mean they fire simultaneously. Think staggered fire people!
-
lol, hey Zelnik, we're talking about the Retribution not the Desolator (which indeed is perfect).
Thing about the Retribution is that its firepower is not impressive. A Dominator, Lunar, Gothic doing the same albeit at shorter range.
Once in an AdMech fleet with AWR upgrade the Retribution becomes great. So you see where the problem is:
long range gunnery is too weak.
-
But the ship is perfect WYSWYG. 12 barrels, st 12 battery. 3 dorsal weapons, 3 dorsal lances. torpedo bays, st 9 torp.
What more do you want!?
-
But the ship is perfect WYSWYG. 12 barrels, st 12 battery. 3 dorsal weapons, 3 dorsal lances. torpedo bays, st 9 torp.
What more do you want!?
Except that on a Lunar or Dominator 4 barrels = 6WB. The ship is far from perfect. It's weak and, as far as I'm concerned, useless.
-
But the ship is perfect WYSWYG. 12 barrels, st 12 battery. 3 dorsal weapons, 3 dorsal lances. torpedo bays, st 9 torp.
What more do you want!?
A stronger Weapon Battery broadside.
-
It's an imperial fast battleship...
If you want a stronger broadside, go admech and take the ark.
The ship is only 345 points, and a 60cm st 12 is still pretty damn respectable. I don't really see the need to make it any better. IF you want a punchier battleship, take an Oberon or Apocalypse.
-
Gah. The Ark is crap. The Apocalypse is a nice idea, but in practice it falls down due to its weak dorsal weaponry (amongst other problems). It should have 9 WBs at least. Weak dorsal WBs might be fine for Emp/Ober because they're carriers, and it might be fine for the Desolator, because it only has cruiser level firepower due to its speed, but on a gunship there's no excuse.
As for the Oberon, well, I do take them instead of the Retribution. That's how sucky the Retribution is. If I want a BB level gun ship I take a carrier ...
-
It's an imperial fast battleship...
If you want a stronger broadside, go admech and take the ark.
The ship is only 345 points, and a 60cm st 12 is still pretty damn respectable. I don't really see the need to make it any better. IF you want a punchier battleship, take an Oberon or Apocalypse.
I don't care about having range of 60 cm. I want more broadside firepower. I don't need the range since the point of the Ret is to stay with the cruisers. Since I will be using the speed anyway, this means the 60cm broadside is wasted. This means 45 cm is enough but up the firepower to 18. The Ret is a gunship. It's sad that its almost outgunned by its carrier counterpart.
-
Now that was exactly my sentiment. I figured that the purpose of the retribution was to lead the crusiers into the fight and blast the opponent to little itty bitty bite sized pieces. The Emperor is all good and well, but what is the point of having 4 shields if you cower at the back of the line and cry "forward!" from relative safety?
My beef with the retibution in its current form is that it can be outpowered by a repulsive class grand cruiser for a considerably less number of points. Yes I know it only has two shields (three if you put it on a large base) and 10 hits, and the range is less than a battleship but think of the principle - a fleet flagship (potentially) losing a duel to old warhorse. That's like Metallica being out-rocked by the Rolling Stones. In my book that's just wrong <grins>
-
Yup, it just doesn't pack enough punch. The Emperor may not have as much firepower, but by the Throne can it focus it! 16WB + 24WBe of Launch bays all to one side smacks the Retribution's 21 into the dust.
The Retribution needs more firepower to compensate for the fact it can't bring it all to bear at once. FP18@45cm would be welcome.
-
Well, I am going to quote one of my favorite villains from my childhood.
"Now Krang, you can't have everything you see on TV". -- The Shredder, TMNT
The Retribution, like the Desolator, are not meant to be giant super-powerful weapons platforms. They are meant to carry good firepower on a platform that does not suffer from the weaknesses of a cruiser. They are both "fast" battleships, which means on the whole, their firepower is reduced compared to the other vessels in their class.
If you want REAL firepower, take an Apocalypse or Oberon, but recognize your suffering from a slower and less maneuverable vessel in both circumstances. Why take the Retrib as it is now? Good firepower at great range with a punishing torpedo salvo for (as battleships go) a low price. Most importantly, it can still turn with a blast marker on it's base, something NO OTHER IMPERIAL BATTLESHIP CAN DO! (aside from the Arc Mech, but that does not count!)
So in the end... Give me an acceptible argument for increasing the strength, because so far I have not seen a good one.
-
Because its firepower is cruiser level. Because its point is big booms on a closing course along the rest of the fleet. Its range is a waste as it does not need it.
-
Wait.
How does a 60cm st12 WB , st 3 dorsal lance at 60cm, and strength 9 torpedo equate to cruiser level? What cruisers are you using sir, because i would love to have some of those!
-
I have a Dominator at the same broadside firepower. Doesn't have the dorsal lances and the NC can more or less hold its own against the torps. But basically I have a cruiser which can almost duplicate the firepower of the Ret within 30 cm. That's sad.
Someone has already pointed out the Repulsive. More broadside firepower slightly less one dorsal lance and 3 torps. Again, sad Retribution. The Avenger is another example of a linebreaker type ship which would excel if it only had 6+ prow.
60 cm range broadsides on a ship which is designed to pierce the enemy lines are useless. Better to cut down the range and up the firepower.
To repeat: if you're breaking the line, you're not using the 60 cm range so why have it? If you're using the range then you're not using the speed, prow armor and torps so why have them? So fix it by just lowering the range and upping the firepower of the broadsides and keeping the cost.
Then fix the Oberon by returning the range to the dorsal and prow WBs so that it is returned to what it is meant to be as a standoff shooting platform with AC support while upping the cost to 355.
Yes we can't have everything which is why one loses the range on the Ret but at least now it's a better designed ship.
-
Whats the difference? 30 more cm of reach. That's huge if used correctly. A st 9 torpedo wins out over a NC any day. If you feel otherwise, take an Apoc. Why is a retrib better then a repulsive? how about +2 shields, +1 turret, 6+ prow armor, better torpedo strength and weapon range.
Normally, I refrain from cross-comparing ships from different fleets, but i am game.
The emperor (if you ignore it's LC) has the same salvo as a carnage.
The Apoc has the same salvo as a executor
The Desolator has the same salvo as a gothic!
Your arguments are utterly invalid, because your wanting "bigger and better" without recognizing that the ship is extremely solid on it's own.
Now, I am not against increasing the strength to say, 14, but again, i fail to see the need.
-
The Ret is a lemon. The Armageddon is an overpriced ship and yet 3 of them are better than 2 Rets. Oh, and by "overpriced" I don't mean slightly either. If it came down by 10 pts it would still be in the upper band of its value.
In this comparison we're looking at same torps, same dorsal lances. Rets have more shields and turrets but that in no way makes up for the resounding 4 lance broadside of the Armageddons. If the Armageddons were dropped to 235 pts each there'd only be a 15 pt differential between them (zero differential if dropped to their true worth of 230 pts). As it stands it might be better to take the Armageddons anyway, even at the increased cost.
So, the Ret is able to compete on fairly even terms with grossly overpriced ships. Yay Ret.
-
Oh, and comparing the torps of the Ret to the NC of the Apocalypse is disingenuous. There is parity of value there, for that weapon only, but the Apocalypse is a bigger piece of poo than the Ret. I have no idea why the dorsal WBs are so weak. However, let's up their strength to 9 and make the broadside lances a simple 45cm range with no special rules and price it the same as the Ret and it would be superior, even with slower speed.
It could take its time on the approach, using the NC on the way in and not having to RO. Once in broadside range its firepower would greatly exceed that of the Ret (45WBe compared to 33WBe) and the lack of 60cm range would be irrelevant, even on this 15cm speed ship.
As it stands however, you gain broadside firepower but lose dorsal firepower and speed and it costs more. Blah. Lemon.
-
Whats the difference? 30 more cm of reach. That's huge if used correctly.
Exactly. Used correctly. Most people here have stated that the Ret is a fast battleship that can keep pace with the IN cruisers. How does one use the IN cruisers? Why shoving them right down the enemy's fire so that they can get their short ranged weapons off. which means the Ret is better off just following the cruisers into 30 cm range and then unleashing its broadsides. Do you really need the 30 cm then? An addition of 45 cm over 30 cm with commiserate increase in FP is much better deal than having puny broadsides at 60 cm.
BTW, Str 9 torps which can be removed by 1 fighter marker makes me feel better with the NC. Also note we are not talking about defensive qualities here but rather of the offense.
As for your ship comparisons:
1. Emperor vs Carnage - yes, same. Gotta love those FP16 focused broadsides. Is the Emperor then underpowered compared to the Carnage? Or is the Carnage just too good? Then we compare them to a Ret's 12? A Carnage WBs can almost outgun the Ret at 60 cm and definitely outgun the Ret at 45 cm? Sad, sad Ret.
2. Apoc vs Executor - yes, same. I can't say the Apoc is better than the Executor though since it has that problem with the crit. If it didn't have that problem then the Apoc would be an excellent gunboat vs the Executor because remember that the lances work better at long ranges than WBs. Compared to a Ret, I would take these two definitely. I would still shoot the Apoc's guns at 60 cm and take the crit. I would take the Executor because it's priced very attractively for what it does.
3. Desolator vs Gothic - actually yes, you now have to wonder if the Desolator should have more WBs and broadside lances. But no one's complaining because its a very cheap battleship.
Your arguments are utterly invalid, because your wanting "bigger and better" without recognizing that the ship is extremely solid on it's own.
Now, I am not against increasing the strength to say, 14, but again, i fail to see the need.
A lot of people besides me have already noted its lacking in firepower esp compared to its carrier brethren. This was especially more so when the ship was priced at 365. I already said then swapping the points is an acceptable compromise but I and many others preferred an increase in the firepower while retaining the points.
A solid ship is something like the Dominator. Not conflicted in design. Anything over 30 cm, I shoot with the NC. Anything within, I shoot with the broadsides. In that sense, the Ret is not solid. I'm paying for something which I am not using (either broadside range or speed and prow armor). That's not solid for me. It's supposed to be a gunship, so let it BE a gunship. As it is the Oberon is a better gunship with the Emperor a close second.
-
ok. i also agree that FP 18 at 45 is the true solution - however, i doubt that the HA's will ever change that, period.
My note on the ret sucking, is that it's weapon output is exactly 1.5 overlords - for the same cost as 1.5 overlords.
we all know the overlord sucks.
however the ret gains DEFENSIVE capability. and an admiral is much more likely to throw a ret into the fray than a precious LB toting empy.
if your buying the ret, your buying A.) a badass looking ship, B.) a bullet magnet.
-
Hi Sigoroth,
regarding the Apocalypse you should keep in mind that they slipped the following into the FAQ2010 rules:
The ship does not take the +1 from the critical damage. Thrusters damaged, but no loss of hitpoint when firing locked on at 60cm.
warning...
I dunno, if we yell loud enough it might happen. ;)
-
ok. i also agree that FP 18 at 45 is the true solution - however, i doubt that the HA's will ever change that, period.
My note on the ret sucking, is that it's weapon output is exactly 1.5 overlords - for the same cost as 1.5 overlords.
we all know the overlord sucks.
however the ret gains DEFENSIVE capability. and an admiral is much more likely to throw a ret into the fray than a precious LB toting empy.
if your buying the ret, your buying A.) a badass looking ship, B.) a bullet magnet.
Never liked the look of the Ret myself. As far as I'm concerned the Oberon, Emperor and Apocalypse all look better.
And sure, if you're going for the approach, you take a Ret. Which makes its range useless. If you're going for range, just save yourself the bother and upgrade to a carrier ... helps out the fleet much better.
Hi Sigoroth,
regarding the Apocalypse you should keep in mind that they slipped the following into the FAQ2010 rules:
The ship does not take the +1 from the critical damage. Thrusters damaged, but no loss of hitpoint when firing locked on at 60cm.
warning...
I dunno, if we yell loud enough it might happen. ;)
Yeah, I know, but even in this regard it's still not all that great. A crit is a crit, still gotta repair the damn thing (at least if you wanna turn any time soon). Besides, you want to use the NC while you can. If you go abeam hoping for long range lances and fail your LO test ...
Eh, well, it's not too hard to get some targets in prow arc and some in the side arc, but this'll likely require course corrections to maintain, which the crit does nothing to help, nor the slow base speed. Either way, I could see this working if it at least had a decent dorsal weapon strength.
Mind you, I may come off harshly on the Apoc, but I do have 2 or 3 of them. So they're not totally useless, just more risky.
-
Val, please note that not everyone is hating on the overlord. I love the thing, and i would "educate" you on it's glory if you lived in the midwest of the U.S.
Again, all i am seeing is "i want it with x weapon battery!" without a real justifiable reason as to why.
Why do the carrier battleships have better broadsides? in reality they don't. if you split it evenly between the two arcs, you get a st 11 battery. You only get one broadside of at 16, and then your done until the ordnance phase.
The retrib has a guaranteed st 12 on both sides, plus the benefit of three dorsal lances. It's not meant to pulverize a whole cruiser in one round unless your shooting up the enemy's nose at close range. It's supposed to be a reliable damage dealer turn-for-turn, which if your using it right, you can score some really solid hits on most ships smaller then it. A battleship killer it is NOT. If you want to wreck battleships, get an Apoc.
-
Val, please note that not everyone is hating on the overlord. I love the thing, and i would "educate" you on it's glory if you lived in the midwest of the U.S.
Again, all i am seeing is "i want it with x weapon battery!" without a real justifiable reason as to why.
Why do the carrier battleships have better broadsides? in reality they don't. if you split it evenly between the two arcs, you get a st 11 battery. You only get one broadside of at 16, and then your done until the ordnance phase.
The retrib has a guaranteed st 12 on both sides, plus the benefit of three dorsal lances. It's not meant to pulverize a whole cruiser in one round unless your shooting up the enemy's nose at close range. It's supposed to be a reliable damage dealer turn-for-turn, which if your using it right, you can score some really solid hits on most ships smaller then it. A battleship killer it is NOT. If you want to wreck battleships, get an Apoc.
Not quite right. A carrier goes abeam at R60 and focusses all she's got: LB, WB and evt Lances. Massive output if one compares that to the Retribution.
A retribution, using his range is a waste because carriers have higher output. And if using ordnance, the range is lost. So reduce the useless range and up the firepower so that it is suited to its role: breaking the line.
-
And since the Retribution it will be closer, thus easier to hit and damage.
-
Val, please note that not everyone is hating on the overlord. I love the thing, and i would "educate" you on it's glory if you lived in the midwest of the U.S.
Well now, you go and say things like this and expect us to treat you seriously. Just because you've permanently got some beer-goggles on regarding certain ships doesn't mean they're actually any good.
Again, all i am seeing is "i want it with x weapon battery!" without a real justifiable reason as to why.
Um, because we should choose how we get to spend our points. We don't want to pay for long range on our ships that are designed to break the line, nor should we have to do so.
Why do the carrier battleships have better broadsides? in reality they don't. if you split it evenly between the two arcs, you get a st 11 battery. You only get one broadside of at 16, and then your done until the ordnance phase.
In reality, they do have better broadsides. Both the Emperor and the Oberon can get half the broadside firepower of the Retribution from just 1 hard point. The Oberon's direct fire broadsides are actually superior to that of the Retribution since lances don't suffer from long range shifts. On top of this both the Oberon and Emperor get great efficiency out of their remaining broadside hardpoints, since "off-side" AC are focusable. All this is on top of the fact that no one in the history of the world has ever had an enemy in each broadside arc in the 46-60cm range bracket with no closer target whereby the Retribution would actually get to use its 24 long range broadside WBs to better effect than the 22 of the Emperor.
The retrib has a guaranteed st 12 on both sides, plus the benefit of three dorsal lances. It's not meant to pulverize a whole cruiser in one round unless your shooting up the enemy's nose at close range. It's supposed to be a reliable damage dealer turn-for-turn, which if your using it right, you can score some really solid hits on most ships smaller then it. A battleship killer it is NOT. If you want to wreck battleships, get an Apoc.
Ah, yes, but if it had a guaranteed st 18 on both sides, plus the benefit of three dorsal lances ... it would be worth taking.
-
Absolutely agree. I have a Retribution, but only because it had the most bad-ass looks and I didn't think to magnetise it at the time. I would certainly be taking an Emperor or Oberon instead.
To use the 60cm range, you have to go abeam, where the other battleships outgun it 40WBe (Emp), 34WBe(Ob) and 24WBe(Apoc) to 21(Ret).
If you use it as a line breaker and have enemies either side, it is again outgunned by the other battleships 46WBe(Emp&Ob), 42WBe(Apoc) to 33WBe(Ret). Even if you argue that the Carriers have to stay on RO whilst the Ret can go Lock On, the Apoc still obliterates it.
Finally, with enemies all round, the Ret finally gets a miniscule edge compared to the Carriers with 46.5WBe compared to 46WBe, the Apoc still obliterates it with 55WBe, AND doesn't have to worry about the choice between RO and Lock On.
And as the Apoc still has a 6+ Prow, the only argument in favour of a Retribution is its low cost and 5cm speed.
Bugger that. Give us FP18.
-
Indeed. I bought a Retribution as I felt that it suited the 'feel' of my fleet and my preferred methods of engagement. Lead from the fore, guns blazing, huzzah! I can picture the Emperor acting brilliantly as a fleet support battleship sending wave after wave of ordnance, or the Apocalyspe bearing down inexorably on the enemy with its nova cannon firing repeatedly whilst the lace decks are brought into range. But the Retribution leaps off the page to me as a cavalier vessel designed lead the cruisers into the heart of the battle and not the sort of vessel to cling to the edges of the conflict - it has been mentioned after all that it is a fast battleship, one of the only fast Imperial ones. Fluff wise, I suppose the Avenger was built with the same prinicple in mind and that is indeed how it functions. Is it not befitting of the Imperial Navy to have a battleship that fulfils that role too? It was with that question in mind that I really started asking why it was that other smaller ships could potentially outshoot it in a close range brawl.
Perhaps an appeal to High Admiralty (assuming I have my acronyms correct) to include the FP18 @45cm alternative as an add on to the list as a ship class variant? The name I have in the back of my mind is His Immutable Will -I'm not sure if that's already taken but I thought it sounded appropriate.
-
Retribution has good firepower for its points cost and for being and imperial BB. It does go ahead of the main force because it can soak up incomming damage. This ship is good as it is.
-
Retribution has good firepower for its points cost and for being and imperial BB. It does go ahead of the main force because it can soak up incomming damage. This ship is good as it is.
Fair point. My query though would be around the usefulness of 60cm weapons batteries for a ship that - to me at least - is designed to be at the fore and hence at much closer range.
-
No, it's rubbish as it is. It's outgunned in every range category and engagement type by another battleship, often by dedicated carriers, and conflicted in its design ethos - it doesn't soak up more firepower than an Apoc either.
We don't want a conflicted, undergunned cheap battleship, we want a line-breaking beast that functions how it looks, even if it has to become more expensive.
-
My point is - don't change the Retribution profile - just make a new variant of BB if you really want smth harder.
-
Quite so Mazila. I wouldn't press for a revision of the official variant, rather the option to upgrade to more powerful but shorter ranged broadside batteries. I think there are one or two cruiser options in the lists that have done so before.
-
Okay, proposal:
Revolution Class Battleship
345 points
12 hits
6+/5+ armour
speed 20cm
turns 45*
turrets 4
shields 4
port weapons battery strength 18 @ 45cm - L
starboard weapons battery strength 18 @ 45cm - R
dorsal lance battery strenght 3 @ 60cm - LFR
prow torpedoes strength 9 @ 30cm speed
Ha!
-
HUZZAH!! ;D
-
My point is - don't change the Retribution profile - just make a new variant of BB if you really want smth harder.
Ok. And assuming the design made just posted by Horizon became official, who in his right mind would take the Retribution as is? Fix the Retribution already.
-
Huzzah! Extinction looms for the Retribution! (so fix it already).
-
I would for an SM VBB for example, or for AM.
-
I would for an SM VBB for example, or for AM.
As one who has played SM, I would take the FP18@45 cm Ret anytime over the FP12@60cm Ret.
-
First one to paint up the new variant wins bragging rights. Ok, so I have a bit of a head start.... ;)
-
I can post one tonight. ;)
-
I win, Adeptus Mechanicus Revolution Class Battleship. haha:
(http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a51/mcroggles/admech/admechfleet002.jpg)
-
Herecy! Revolution sounds a bit heretical - I will take this ship for my Chaos fleet.
-
I know its not the point, but what are those escorts? :)
-
Forgeworld Hunter Class Destroyers.